Monday, January 17, 2022

Covid News

Of an incident at Ferris State University:

David Eisler, the president of Ferris State University, said in a statement that he had been "shocked and appalled" by Prof. Barry Mehler’s video. (AP) Eduardo Medina Mon, January 17, 2022, 8:05 AM In a profanity-laced introduction video for a history class, professor Barry Mehler wears an astronaut-style helmet with air filters, tells his Ferris State University students that they are “vectors of disease” and says that their grades are predetermined, regardless of their efforts. “I will not take questions in class because I’m wearing this” helmet “in order to stay alive,” Mehler, 74, says toward the end of the video, using an expletive. “So please, come to class. Enjoy the show. I’ll be there regularly because I have no choice.” The bizarre 14-minute video, which has been viewed more than 360,000 times since it was posted on his YouTube page Jan. 9, resulted in Mehler being placed on paid suspension while university officials investigated his eccentric introduction to the new semester, according to Sandy Gholston, a university spokesperson.


Mehler, whose LinkedIn page identifies him as the founder of the Institute for the Study of Academic Racism at Ferris State and says that he teaches classes on “the history of science and the interface between science and racism,” did not respond to calls and an email seeking comment Saturday, but on Friday, he told The Associated Press that the video was “a performance.” Charles Bacon, president of the Ferris Faculty Association, said in a statement Saturday that the university’s response to the video was “intimidation and coercion directed at all faculty, not just Dr. Mehler.” He added that the association considered the suspension to be an “attack on academic freedom” that suppressed intellectual discourse. Whether students watching the video considered it funny was unclear, but those tuning in to class for the first time would have heard Mehler say, about five minutes in, “I stand before you today beholden to no human.” He then tells students that if they want to complain to the dean, they can “go ahead” because he is “retiring at the end of this year” and does not care — all while mixing in six expletives. As he shares his screen, a Word document can be seen on Mehler’s computer that contains all 1,687 words of his speech, with certain parts (“MORE BAD NEWS”) appearing in bold type. When it was time to discuss grading, he provided unusual direction: “You have no control over your grade.” It doesn’t matter how “hard you work or how great your grades are,” he says, adding, “my grading system is based on the Calvinist doctrine of predestination” — a theory, developed by 16th-century theologian John Calvin, that one’s entrance into heaven or hell was predetermined by God, regardless of one’s actions on Earth.

From the New York Times

[One wonders if certain Law professors subscribed to this theory of grading???]

Elsewhere, from the Newark Star-Ledger

Winnie the Pooh goes public, more or less

Of copyright, note the post Winnie-the-Pooh, Bambi, and 400,000 sound recordings enter the public domain in 2022 , which includes text related to the protection of derivative works:

“You can use the left version of Winnie-the-Pooh along with all of his adorable personality traits from that book but you should probably steer clear of using the right version because there is probably enough ‘original, creative expression,’ added that would qualify for copyright,” says Duke's Jennifer Jenkins.

See also page A15 of the January 17, 2022 Newark Star-Ledger for a cartoon by Luke McGarry on the derivative work issue.

National Covid death rate 3.8; new case rate 1,683.3 per 100K per week as of January 15, 2022

The 7-day case rate as of January 15, 2022:

7 DAY CASE RATE PER 100,000 1,683.3

Some of the states with high cases:

Rhode Island 3,134.3 New York City* 2,715.9 Delaware 2,393.2 New York (Level of Community Transmission)* 2,236.5 Utah 2,130.4 California 2,130 Massachusetts 2,123.4 New Jersey 2,023.5 Colorado 1,985

As to DEATH rate:

7 DAY DEATH RATE PER 100,000 3.8

TOTAL DEATHS 847,577 +2,596 New Deaths

Some of the states with higher rates:

Indiana 9.1 New York City* 8.6 New Mexico 7.7 Maryland 7.4 Ohio 7.3 Pennsylvania 7.1 Illinois 6.9 Delaware 6.8 New Jersey 6.6 Arizona 6.2 Tennessee 6.1 Iowa 5.8 Massachusetts 5.4 West Virginia 5.3 Connecticut 5 New York* 5 Rhode Island 4.7 Missouri 4.6 New Hampshire 4.4 South Dakota 4.2 Wisconsin 4.2 Maine 4.1

Note the presence of New England states.


Data to Sunday, Jan. 15
CDC | Data as of: January 15, 2022 4:53 PM ET. Posted: January 15, 2022 6:13 PM ET

Saturday, January 15, 2022

CAFC does case involving a Detachable Magazine to a Firearm with Fixed Magazine in EVOLUSION CONCEPTS, INC. v. HOC EVENTS, INC.


Evolusion Concepts, Inc. owns U.S. Patent No. 8,756,845, titled “Method and Device for Converting Firearm with Detachable Magazine to a Firearm with Fixed Magazine.” In the main case before us, Evolusion sued Juggernaut Tactical, Inc. in the Central District of California, alleging infringement of claims 1–3 and 8–10 of the ’845 patent. On the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment regarding infringement, the district court granted Juggernaut summary judgment of non-infringement. Evolusion Concepts, Inc. v. Juggernaut Tactical, Inc., No. 8:18-cv-01378, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77792, at *27 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 5, 2020) (Juggernaut Decision). The court’s key ruling was that the term “magazine catch bar” in the asserted claims of the ’845 patent excludes a factoryinstalled magazine catch bar. Id. at *13–22. That claim construction concededly precludes literal infringement, the court held, because Juggernaut’s products use the factory installed magazine catch bar. Id. at *22–23. The court also determined that Juggernaut does not infringe under the doctrine of equivalents. Id. at *23–26.

On Evolusion’s appeal, we hold that the term “magazine catch bar” in the asserted claims includes a factoryinstalled magazine catch bar. We therefore reverse the grant of summary judgment of non-infringement, reverse the denial of summary judgment of direct infringement as to the independent claims 1 and 8, and remand for further proceedings in Appeal No. 21-1987, which is the appeal in the Juggernaut case. We also vacate and remand in Appeal No. 21-1963, which involves a separate, related case, discussed near the end of this opinion.

The main point at issue

Evolusion then sought summary judgment of direct infringement, as well as induced and contributory infringement, of claims 1–3 and 8–10. Juggernaut, for its part, moved for summary judgment of non-infringement. At that time, construction of the term “magazine catch bar” became necessary, because in Juggernaut’s products the factory-installed magazine catch bar is retained in the conversion of a firearm to one with a fixed magazine. The parties agreed that whether Juggernaut infringes independent claims 1 and 8 “depends entirely on” whether the claim phrase “magazine catch bar” includes a factoryinstalled (OEM) magazine catch bar. Juggernaut Decision at *7.

(...) We begin with the claim-construction issue presented respecting claims 1 and 8. Claim construction is ultimately a question of law, decided de novo on review, as are the intrinsic-evidence aspects of a claim-construction analysis. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S. 318, 331 (2015). The district court relied for its claim construction in Juggernaut only on intrinsic evidence from the specification, see Juggernaut Decision at *16–22, and we therefore review the construction de novo. The question is whether the term “magazine catch bar” in the asserted claims includes a factory-installed magazine catch bar.

Of note

Juggernaut instead relies on unasserted claim 15, which, it argues, informs the meaning of “magazine catch bar” in claims 1 and 8 and precludes adopting the ordinary meaning of “magazine catch bar.” Juggernaut is correct that the meaning of the term in claims 1 and 8 could well be informed by a meaning of the term made sufficiently clear in claim 15. See Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1314. But Juggernaut is incorrect that the use of “magazine catch bar” in claim 15 narrows the meaning of the term to support the urged exclusion of factory-installed magazine catch bars.


Juggernaut argues, and Evolusion concedes, that the disclosed embodiments do not illustrate OEM magazine catch bars. See id., figs. 3 & 4. But that cannot make a difference in this case. We have repeatedly held that “it is not enough that the only embodiments, or all of the embodiments, contain a particular limitation to limit claims beyond their plain meaning.” Unwired Planet, LLC v. Apple, Inc., 829 F.3d 1353, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Here, nothing in the specification suggests that factory (or OEM) provenance of a bar disqualifies it from being part of the invention if, as a structural matter, it is a magazine catch bar under the ordinary meaning. And nothing in the specification suggests that factory (or OEM) installation precludes the possession of the structural features required by the invention. The specification reiterates the background principle that the claims are not limited to the illustrated embodiments. ’845 patent, col. 4, lines 46–53.


Finally, Juggernaut argues that the patent is “abundantly clear” that the invention cannot function with the OEM magazine catch assembly. Juggernaut’s Opening Br. at 8. But Juggernaut fails to cite to any portion of the specification that supports this operability assertion


We reverse the court’s grant of summary judgment of no infringement, reverse the court’s denial of summary judgment of infringement of claims 1 and 8, and remand for the district court to address the other asserted claims. Because we reverse the court’s determination of literal infringement, we need not reach the court’s determination of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. We vacate the award of attorney’s fees because Juggernaut is no longer a prevailing party, a status required to receive a fee award under 35 U.S.C. § 285.

Of the meaning of "final"

The April 14 order on its face merely denies Evolusion a judgment in its favor; it does not order any judgment against Evolusion, let alone a final judgment. Nor is the clerk-entered Rule 55(a) “default” a final judgment against Evolusion. See 15A C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 3914.5 & nn.1.50 & 2 (2d ed.). But, although Evolusion has not addressed the jurisdictional finality problem raised by those facts, we think it proper to treat the April 14 order as a final judgment. The order declares that Evolusion has no claim it can pursue, and in light of that declaration there was evidently nothing left to do in the litigation in district court after the April 14 order. Indeed, the clerk notified the Patent and Trademark Office of termination of the case on the same date, and the court’s official electronic docket records the case as closed. In these circumstances, we treat the April 14 order as a final judgment, which we have jurisdiction to review under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1). For the reasons set forth in our discussion of the Juggernaut case, we vacate the April 14 order in the HOC case and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

National Covid death rate remains at 3.7 per 100K per week on January 14, 2022

Between 13 and 14 January 2022, the national Covid death rate remained constant at 3.7:

7 DAY DEATH RATE PER 100,000 3.7

TOTAL DEATHS 844,841 +1,962 New Deaths

The states at, or above, average:

Indiana 10 Delaware 9.7 New York City* 8.6 Maryland 7.3 Pennsylvania 6.9 New Mexico 6.7 Illinois 6.5 Ohio 6.5 West Virginia 6.2 New Jersey 6.1 Iowa 5.8 Arizona 5.7 Massachusetts 5.3 New York* 5 Connecticut 4.5 Missouri 4.4 Nebraska 4.3 Rhode Island 4.3 Northern Mariana Islands 3.9 Tennessee 3.9 Arkansas 3.7 Kentucky 3.7 Minnesota 3.7 Wisconsin 3.7

Highly vaccinated New England has three states above the national average.

The national Covid CASE rate for January 14, 2022

7 DAY CASE RATE PER 100,000 1,675.4

The states with higher case rates:

Rhode Island 3,192.2 New York City* 2,715.9 Delaware 2,350.3 Massachusetts 2,333.7 New York (Level of Community Transmission)* 2,289.1 New Jersey 2,196.4 California 2,090.3 Utah 2,078.6 Florida 2,004.4 New York* 1,964.9 Colorado 1,911.1 Louisiana 1,911 Arkansas 1,901.4 Connecticut 1,827.5 Puerto Rico 1,823.2 South Carolina 1,818.2 Hawaii 1,817 Kansas 1,789.7 Vermont 1,785.8 Illinois 1,739.8 District of Columbia 1,730.8 Wisconsin 1,707.1 New Hampshire 1,585.3 Pennsylvania 1,564


CDC | Data as of: January 14, 2022 1:41 PM ET. Posted: January 14, 2022 3:31 PM ET

On January 10, 2022, New Jersey had the highest case rate of any state: New Jersey 2,483.4

The front page of the Newark Star-Ledger had the following story on January 15, 2022:

Friday, January 14, 2022

University of Chicago Law School Phoenix, circa 1993

Merely as a flashback/prediction:

Relevant words:

University of Chicago Maroon

Class of 1971

Marlene Dixon

Roy Guttman

Jean Twenge

Karl Weintraub

Thursday, January 13, 2022

U.S. Supreme Court rules against Biden/OSHA mandate

Of interest in the per curiam 6-3 opinion:

OSHA published its vaccine mandate on November 5, 2021. Scores of parties—including States, businesses, trade groups, and nonprofit organizations—filed petitions for review, with at least one petition arriving in each regional Court of Appeals. The cases were consolidated in the Sixth Circuit, which was selected at random pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2112(a). Prior to consolidation, however, the Fifth Circuit stayed OSHA’s rule pending further judicial review. BST Holdings, 17 F. 4th 604. It held that the mandate likely exceeded OSHA’s statutory authority, raised separation-ofpowers concerns in the absence of a clear delegation from Congress, and was not properly tailored to the risks facing different types of workers and workplaces. When the consolidated cases arrived at the Sixth Circuit, two things happened. First, many of the petitioners— nearly 60 in all—requested initial hearing en banc. Second, OSHA asked the Court of Appeals to vacate the Fifth Circuit’s existing stay. The Sixth Circuit denied the request for initial hearing en banc by an evenly divided 8-to-8 vote. In re MCP No. 165, 20 F. 4th 264 (2021). Chief Judge Sutton dissented, joined by seven of his colleagues. He reasoned that the Secretary’s “broad assertions of administrative power demand unmistakable legislative support,” which he found lacking. Id., at 268. A three-judge panel then dissolved the Fifth Circuit’s stay, holding that OSHA’s mandate was likely consistent with the agency’s statutory and constitutional authority. See In re MCP No. 165, 2021 WL 5989357, ___ F. 4th ___ (CA6 2021). Judge Larsen dissented. Various parties then filed applications in this Court requesting that we stay OSHA’s emergency standard. We consolidated two of those applications—one from the National Federation of Independent Business, and one from a coalition of States—and heard expedited argument on January 7, 2022.

The Sixth Circuit concluded that a stay of the rule was not justified. We disagree.

Applicants are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the Secretary lacked authority to impose the mandate. Administrative agencies are creatures of statute. They accordingly possess only the authority that Congress has provided. The Secretary has ordered 84 million Americans to either obtain a COVID–19 vaccine or undergo weekly medical testing at their own expense. This is no “everyday exercise of federal power.” In re MCP No. 165, 20 F. 4th, at 272 (Sutton, C. J., dissenting). It is instead a significant encroachment into the lives—and health—of a vast number of employees. “We expect Congress to speak clearly when authorizing an agency to exercise powers of vast economic and political significance.” Alabama Assn. of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Servs., 594 U. S. ___, ___ (2021) (per curiam) (slip op., at 6) (internal quotation marks omitted). There can be little doubt that OSHA’s mandate qualifies as an exercise of such authority. The question, then, is whether the Act plainly authorizes the Secretary’s mandate. It does not. The Act empowers the Secretary to set workplace safety standards, not broad public health measures. See 29 U. S. C. §655(b) (directing the Secretary to set “occupational safety and health standards” (emphasis added)); §655(c)(1) (authorizing the Secretary to impose emergency temporary standards necessary to protect “employees” from grave danger in the workplace). Confirming the point, the Act’s provisions typically speak to hazards that employees face at work. See, e.g., §§651, 653, 657. And no provision of the Act addresses public health more generally, which falls outside of OSHA’s sphere of expertise.

The Solicitor General does not dispute that OSHA is limited to regulating “work-related dangers.” Response Brief for OSHA in No. 21A244 etc., p. 45 (OSHA Response). She instead argues that the risk of contracting COVID–19 qualifies as such a danger. We cannot agree. Although COVID– 19 is a risk that occurs in many workplaces, it is not an occupational hazard in most. COVID–19 can and does spread at home, in schools, during sporting events, and everywhere else that people gather.


That is not to say OSHA lacks authority to regulate occupation-specific risks related to COVID–19. Where the virus poses a special danger because of the particular features of an employee’s job or workplace, targeted regulations are plainly permissible. We do not doubt, for example, that OSHA could regulate researchers who work with the COVID–19 virus. So too could OSHA regulate risks associated with working in particularly crowded or cramped environments. But the danger present in such workplaces differs in both degree and kind from the everyday risk of contracting COVID–19 that all face. OSHA’s indiscriminate approach fails to account for this crucial distinction— between occupational risk and risk more generally—and accordingly the mandate takes on the character of a general public health measure, rather than an “occupational safety or health standard.” 29 U. S. C. §655(b) (emphasis added).

Concurring opinion:

JUSTICE GORSUCH, with whom JUSTICE THOMAS and JUSTICE ALITO join, concurring. The central question we face today is: Who decides? No one doubts that the COVID–19 pandemic has posed challenges for every American. Or that our state, local, and national governments all have roles to play in combating the disease. The only question is whether an administrative agency in Washington, one charged with overseeing workplace safety, may mandate the vaccination or regular testing of 84 million people. Or whether, as 27 States before us submit, that work belongs to state and local governments across the country and the people’s elected representatives in Congress. This Court is not a public health authority. But it is charged with resolving disputes about which authorities possess the power to make the laws that govern us under the Constitution and the laws of the land.

On January 13, 2022, the national Covid death rate at 3.7; case rate at 1650.4 per 100K per week; NJ case rate at 2,293.1

On January 13, 2022, the national Covid case rate was:

7 DAY CASE RATE PER 100,000 1,650.4

The "higher" states in case rate are

Rhode Island 3,534.4 New York City* 3,162.9 New York (Level of Community Transmission)* 2,529.4 Massachusetts 2,416.4 New Jersey 2,293.1 Delaware 2,159.2 Florida 2,087 New York* 2,048.1 Utah 1,951.4 Hawaii 1,912.3 Louisiana 1,892.6 California 1,862.6 Virgin Islands 1,834.6 Vermont 1,814.9 Puerto Rico 1,810.3 Connecticut 1,805.6 Colorado 1,798.8 Illinois 1,795.4 South Carolina 1,792.8 Kansas 1,789.7 Arkansas 1,729 District of Columbia 1,697.9 Wisconsin 1,663.2 Pennsylvania 1,568.5

CDC | Data as of: January 13, 2022 1:52 PM ET. Posted: January 13, 2022 3:20 PM ET

The DEATH rate has been climbing

7 DAY DEATH RATE PER 100,000 3.7

The worse states for death rate:

Indiana 11 Delaware 9.4 New York City* 8.2 Pennsylvania 7.8 Maryland 7.2 New Mexico 6.7 Ohio 6.5 Illinois 6.1 West Virginia 6.1 New Jersey 5.9 Arizona 5.8 Iowa 5.8 Nebraska 5.7 Massachusetts 5.4 New York* 4.8 Connecticut 4.5 Missouri 4.5 Rhode Island 4.2 Wisconsin 4.1 Northern Mariana Islands 3.9 Arkansas 3.8 Idaho 3.8 Kentucky 3.8 Minnesota 3.8 Tennessee 3.5

There was a bit of a flap starting on Monday, January 11, 2022:

Throughout Monday [11 January 2022], right-wing media and GOP politicians ran wild with a short video clip of CDC Director Rochelle Walensky supposedly saying that the vast majority of all coronavirus deaths were among people with at least four comorbidities. According to the usual conservative firebrands, the video showed Walensky admitting that the threat of COVID-19 had been exaggerated from the start. (...) One of the issues at play—and perhaps why Walensky’s response was taken easily completely out of context—is that GMA edited the CDC director’s response to anchor Cecilia Vega’s question during the broadcast. “I want to ask you about those encouraging headlines that we’re talking about this morning, this new study showing just how well vaccines are working to prevent severe illness,” Vega asked. “Given that, is it time to start rethinking how we’re living with this virus, that it’s potentially here to stay?” In the segment that aired, this was Walensky’s response: “The overwhelming number of death, over 75 percent, occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities. So really, these are people who were unwell to begin with. And yes, really encouraging news in the context of omicron. This means not only just to get your primary series but to get your booster series, and yes, we’re really encouraged by these results.” (...) While Walensky’s comments that aired on Friday did not directly reference the study about vaccinated people, GMA included an on-air graphic noting that the CDC chief was talking about vaccine effectiveness. Furthermore, there was still enough context to tie it back to that study, as conservative writer Allahpundit noted on Monday afternoon. “Out of 1.2 million vaccinated people, just 36 died,” the influential blogger wrote. “That’s .003 percent, a phenomenal survival rate. Of those 36, slightly more than three-quarters had four comorbidities. Which is to say, even if you have three comorbidities, getting vaxxed all but guarantees that you won’t die if you’re infected.” link: Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham Run Wild With Debunked Claim on COVID Deaths Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham Run Wild With Debunked Claim on COVID Deaths Illustration by The Daily Beast/GettyWhen it comes to Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, apparently no amount of...

The study in question in the "debate"

Summary of referenced study: Among 1,228,664 persons who completed primary vaccination during December 2020–October 2021, severe COVID-19–associated outcomes (0.015%) or death (0.0033%) were rare. Risk factors for severe outcomes included age ≥65 years, immunosuppressed, and six other underlying conditions. All persons with severe outcomes had at least one risk factor; 78% of persons who died had at least four. (...) Among 1,228,664 persons who completed primary vaccination during December 2020–October 2021, a total of 2,246 (18.0 per 10,000 vaccinated persons) developed COVID-19 and 189 (1.5 per 10,000) had a severe outcome, including 36 who died (0.3 deaths per 10,000). Risk for severe outcomes was higher among persons who were aged ≥65 years, were immunosuppressed, or had at least one of six other underlying conditions. All persons with severe outcomes had at least one of these risk factors, and 77.8% of those who died had four or more risk factors. Severe COVID-19 outcomes after primary vaccination are rare; however, vaccinated persons who are aged ≥65 years, are immunosuppressed, or have other underlying conditions might be at increased risk. These persons should receive targeted interventions including chronic disease management, precautions to reduce exposure, additional primary and booster vaccine doses, and effective pharmaceutical therapy as indicated to reduce risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes. Increasing COVID-19 vaccination coverage is a public health priority. link:

But separately, recall a NYT article from a month previously

Monday, January 10, 2022

New Jersey the worst state in the nation for new covid cases at 2483.4 cases per 100K per week; national death rate rises to 3.3

The CDC reports the national average death rate on January 10, 2021:

7 DAY DEATH RATE PER 100,000 3.3

TOTAL DEATHS 835,302 +404 New Deaths

The "bad" states:

Indiana 8.6 Delaware 8.1 Wyoming 8 Pennsylvania 7.4 Nebraska 6.6 Connecticut 6.1 New Mexico 6.1 Maryland 6 Northern Mariana Islands 5.8 Arizona 5.7 Maine 5.4 Ohio 5.4 New York City* 5.3 Illinois 5.1 Iowa 5.1 West Virginia 4.7 Michigan 4.6 New Jersey 4.5 Minnesota 4.4 Missouri 4.4 Massachusetts 4.3 New Hampshire 4.3 New York* 4.3 Idaho 4.2 South Dakota 4.1 Arkansas 3.9 Wisconsin 3.9 Utah 3.4 Kansas 3.3 Nevada 2.9 Rhode Island 2.9
The CASE rate on January 10, 2022

7 DAY CASE RATE PER 100,000 1,422

The "bad" states

New York City* 3,372.6 New York (Level of Community Transmission)* 2,667.1 New Jersey 2,483.4 Rhode Island 2,358.3 Virgin Islands 2,290.9 District of Columbia 2,232.2 New York* 2,131.1 Florida 2,102.4 Massachusetts 2,021.2 Delaware 1,914.6 Connecticut 1,781.7 Puerto Rico 1,780.9 Louisiana 1,715.1 Hawaii 1,685.3 West Virginia 1,663.8 Kansas 1,596.7 Illinois 1,589.6 Missouri 1,534.8 Maryland 1,475 Pennsylvania 1,468.6 Michigan 1,455.8 Mississippi 1,438.4 Alabama 1,434.4 Utah 1,405

CDC | Data as of: January 10, 2022 2:46 PM ET. Posted: January 10, 2022 4:14 PM ET


On a separate note, observe that the Newark Star-Ledger on January 10, 2022 stated that the transmission rate (Rt or Ro) in New Jersey on Janaury 9, 2022 was DOWN to 1.55 !!

Sunday, January 09, 2022

National Covid death rate 3.2 per 100K per week on January 9, 2022; New Jersey Covid

As to national numbers:

7 DAY DEATH RATE PER 100,000 3.2 CDC | Data as of: January 9, 2022 12:37 PM ET. Posted: January 9, 2022 2:01 PM ET Northern Mariana Islands 11.6 Indiana 8.6 Wyoming 8 Nebraska 6.6 Pennsylvania 6.4 Connecticut 6.1 New Mexico 6.1 Michigan 6 Maryland 5.8 Maine 5.4 Ohio 5.4 Arizona 5.3 Illinois 5.1 Iowa 5.1 Arkansas 5 New York City* 4.9 West Virginia 4.7 Delaware 4.5 Minnesota 4.4 Massachusetts 4.3 New Hampshire 4.3 Missouri 4.2 Idaho 4.1 South Dakota 4.1 Wisconsin 3.9 New Jersey 3.8 New York* 3.8

In New Jersey

Saturday, January 08, 2022

National covid death rate climbs to 3.2 per 100K per week as of January 8, 2022

The CDC reported the national Covid death rate as

7 DAY DEATH RATE PER 100,000 3.2

TOTAL DEATHS 834,077 +2,348 New Deaths

CDC | Data as of: January 8, 2022 1:36 PM ET. Posted: January 8, 2022 3:04 PM ET

The "bad" states

Wyoming 8 Nebraska 6.6 Pennsylvania 6.4 Connecticut 6.1 New Mexico 6.1 Michigan 6 Maryland 5.8 Maine 5.4 Ohio 5.4 Arizona 5.3 Illinois 5.1 Iowa 5.1 Arkansas 5 New York City* 4.9 West Virginia 4.7 Delaware 4.5 Minnesota 4.4 Massachusetts 4.3 New Hampshire 4.3 Missouri 4.2 Idaho 4.1 South Dakota 4.1 Wisconsin 3.9 New Jersey 3.8 New York* 3.8 Rhode Island 3.8 Utah 3.4 Kansas 3.3 Nevada 2.9 Colorado 2.7

One notes that states in (highly vaccinated) New England are among the "bad" states.

In terms of cases

7 DAY CASE RATE PER 100,000 1,409.5

Among the bad states

Rhode Island 2,805.4 New York (Level of Community Transmission)* 2,499.9 New Jersey 2,456.7 Virgin Islands 2,342.7 Puerto Rico 2,330.7 District of Columbia 2,232.2 Massachusetts 2,021.2 New York* 1,976.9 Florida 1,912.3 Delaware 1,863 Connecticut 1,781.7 Louisiana 1,715.1 Kansas 1,596.7 Illinois 1,589.6 Hawaii 1,485.2 Michigan 1,455.8 Mississippi 1,438.4 Utah 1,405 South Carolina 1,343.2 Virginia 1,335.4 Pennsylvania 1,331.6 West Virginia 1,312.7 Georgia 1,308.3 Tennessee 1,300 Texas 1,276.3 Arkansas 1,271 Alabama 1,238.2 North Carolina 1,236.8 Maryland 1,229.9 Indiana 1,226.5 Missouri 1,197.6 California 1,190.2 New Hampshire 1,169.7 Ohio 1,161.2 Vermont 1,161.1 South Dakota 1,153.8


Meanwhile, in New Jersey, old people are absorbing another beat-down; from the Newark Star-Ledger on January 8, 2022: